Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · TH Open 2023; 07(01): e56-e64
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1762588
Original Article

Automated Light Transmission Aggregometry with and without Platelet Poor Plasma Reference: A Method Comparison

Ulrich J. Sachs
1   Department of Thrombosis and Haemostasis, Giessen University Hospital, Giessen, Germany
2   Institute for Clinical Immunology, Transfusion Medicine, and Haemostaseology, Justus Liebig University, Giessen, Germany
,
Lida Röder
2   Institute for Clinical Immunology, Transfusion Medicine, and Haemostaseology, Justus Liebig University, Giessen, Germany
,
Nina Cooper
2   Institute for Clinical Immunology, Transfusion Medicine, and Haemostaseology, Justus Liebig University, Giessen, Germany
,
Christian Radon
3   Behnk Elektronik, Norderstedt, Germany
,
Hans-Jürgen Kolde
4   Consulting Diagnostics, Seefeld, Germany
› Author Affiliations Funding This work was supported by Behnk Elektronik GmbH & Co.KG, 22851 Norderstedt, Germany.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Light transmission aggregometry (LTA) is considered the gold standard for the evaluation of platelet function but is labor-intensive and involves numerous manual steps. Automation may contribute to standardization. Here, we evaluate the performance characteristics of a new automated instrument, Thrombomate XRA (TXRA), and compare it against a manual instrument (PAP-8).

Materials and Methods Leftover blood samples from blood donors or patients were tested in parallel with identical reagents and in identical concentrations both manually using PAP-8 and automated on the TXRA. In addition to precision and method comparison, an additional evaluation was performed on the TXRA against “virtual” platelet-poor plasma (VPPP) based on artificial intelligence. The main focus was on comparing the maximum aggregation (MA%) values.

Results Precision for MA% ranged from 1.4 to 4.6% on TXRA for all reagents. Normal ranges for 100 healthy blood donors on both instruments were in a similar range for all reagents, with a tendency to slightly higher values with TXRA. Most agonists resulted in normally distributed MA%. Comparing 47 patient samples on both devices showed a good correlation for both slope and MA% with some differences in individual samples with epinephrine and TRAP. Correlation between the TXRA measurement against PPP and “virtual” PPP demonstrated excellent correlation. Reaction signatures of both devices were very similar.

Conclusion TXRA provides reproducible LTA results that correlate with an established manual method when tested against PPP or VPPP. Its ability to perform LTA only from platelet-rich plasma without requiring autologous PPP simplifies LTA. TXRA is an important step not only for further standardizing LTA but also for a more widespread use of this important method.

Keywords

light transmission aggregometry - platelet function - precision - reproducibility - reference ranges


Publication History

Received: 02 September 2022

Accepted: 22 December 2022

Article published online:
22 February 2023

© 2023. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Sang Y, Roest M, de Laat B, de Groot PG, Huskens D. Interplay between platelets and coagulation. Blood Rev 2021; 46: 100733
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Brennan Y, Levade M, Ward CM. Acquired platelet function disorders. Thromb Res 2020; 196: 561-568
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Lassila R. Platelet function tests in bleeding disorders. Semin Thromb Hemost 2016; 42 (03) 185-190
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Le Blanc J, Mullier F, Vayne C, Lordkipanidzé M. Advances in platelet function testing - light transmission aggregometry and beyond. J Clin Med 2020; 9 (08) 9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Gresele P, Harrison P, Bury L. et al. Diagnosis of suspected inherited platelet function disorders: results of a worldwide survey. J Thromb Haemost 2014; 12 (09) 1562-1569
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Gresele P. Subcommittee on Platelet Physiology of the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis. Diagnosis of inherited platelet function disorders: guidance from the SSC of the ISTH. J Thromb Haemost 2015; 13 (02) 314-322
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Hayward CPM, Moffat KA, Brunet J. et al. Update on diagnostic testing for platelet function disorders: what is practical and useful?. Int J Lab Hematol 2019; 41 (Suppl. 01) 26-32
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Wagner M, Uzun G, Bakchoul T, Althaus K. Diagnosis of platelet function disorders: a challenge for laboratories. Hamostaseologie 2022; 42 (01) 36-45
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Born GV. Aggregation of blood platelets by adenosine diphosphate and its reversal. Nature 1962; 194: 927-929
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 O'Brien JR. Platelet aggregation: part I some effects of the adenosine phosphates, thrombin, and cocaine upon platelet adhesiveness. J Clin Pathol 1962; 15 (05) 446-452
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Hayward CP, Pai M, Liu Y. et al. Diagnostic utility of light transmission platelet aggregometry: results from a prospective study of individuals referred for bleeding disorder assessments. J Thromb Haemost 2009; 7 (04) 676-684
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Michelson AD, Frelinger III AL, Furman MI. Current options in platelet function testing. Am J Cardiol 2006; 98 (10A): 4N-10N
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Söderström AC, Nybo M, Nielsen C, Vinholt PJ. The effect of centrifugation speed and time on pre-analytical platelet activation. Clin Chem Lab Med 2016; 54 (12) 1913-1920
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Stegnar M, Knezevic A, Bozic-Mijovski M. The effect of pre-analytical variables on light transmittance aggregometry in citrated platelet-rich plasma from healthy subjects. Clin Chem Lab Med 2010; 48 (10) 1463-1465
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Cattaneo M, Hayward CP, Moffat KA, Pugliano MT, Liu Y, Michelson AD. Results of a worldwide survey on the assessment of platelet function by light transmission aggregometry: a report from the platelet physiology subcommittee of the SSC of the ISTH. J Thromb Haemost 2009; 7 (06) 1029
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Cattaneo M, Cerletti C, Harrison P. et al. Recommendations for the standardization of light transmission aggregometry: a consensus of the working party from the platelet physiology subcommittee of SSC/ISTH. J Thromb Haemost 2013; 11: 1183-1189
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Merolla M, Nardi MA, Berger JS. Centrifugation speed affects light transmission aggregometry. Int J Lab Hematol 2012; 34 (01) 81-85
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Zhou L, Schmaier AH. Platelet aggregation testing in platelet-rich plasma: description of procedures with the aim to develop standards in the field. Am J Clin Pathol 2005; 123 (02) 172-183
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Ling LQ, Liao J, Niu Q. et al. Evaluation of an automated light transmission aggregometry. Platelets 2017; 28 (07) 712-719
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Budde U. Diagnosis of platelet function defects with platelet aggregometers. . [German] J Lab Med 2002; 26: 564-571
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Ringwald J, Braun S, Hahn B, Strobel J, Zimmermann R, Eckstein R. Paired comparison of two light transmission platelet aggregation devices in healthy individuals. 53rd Annual Meeting Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis Research, February 4–7, 2009; Wien
    PubMedGoogle Scholar